Thameslink Programme Environmental Management Plan and … · 2019-06-17 · Environmental Appraisal/Action Plan N420-WSP-ERP-EN-000005 The purpose of the Environmental Appraisal/Action

Infrastructure Investment

Thameslink Programme

Document Reference Number

Project Code

Originator Code

Document ID Code

Discipline Code

Sequential Number

Version

N420 NRT REP CN 000016 1.0

Thameslink Programme

Environmental Management Plan and Sustainable Delivery Statement Close-out Report – London Bridge Station Redevelopment Programme

Prepared by:

Name Isabel Simpson

Role/Job Title Costain Environmental Advisor Date 29/08/2018

Approved:

Name Annamarie Compton

Role/Job Title Network Rail Consents Manager Date 29/08/2018

Version History

Issue Date Amendments and summary of changes

0.1 01.09.18 First Issue

Page 2 of 65

Table of Contents

1. Executive Summary .................................................................................................... 4

1.1 Sustainability Facts at a glance .............................................................................................................................. 6

2. Purpose ........................................................................................................................ 7

3. Project Description ..................................................................................................... 7 4. Abbreviations & Definitions ....................................................................................... 8 5. Documentation & Records ......................................................................................... 9

5.1 Summary ................................................................................................................................................................ 9

6. Environmental Key Performance Indicators ........................................................... 18

6.1 Carbon ................................................................................................................................................................. 18

6.2 Waste ................................................................................................................................................................... 22

6.3 Water ................................................................................................................................................................... 24

6.4 Incidents and Close Calls ..................................................................................................................................... 26

6.5 Legal Breaches .................................................................................................................................................... 30

7. Sustainable Delivery Statement Objectives – Achievements ................................ 31

7.1 Best Practice Case Studies .................................................................................................................................. 31

7.2 Whole Life Costing Case Studies ......................................................................................................................... 31

7.3 Resource Efficiencies and Savings ...................................................................................................................... 31

7.4 National Skills Academy ....................................................................................................................................... 33

7.5 Project Awards ..................................................................................................................................................... 34

8. Sustainable Delivery Statement Objectives – Lessons Learned........................... 35

8.1 Lessons Learnt Workshop ................................................................................................................................... 35

8.2 Challenges ........................................................................................................................................................... 36

8.3 Successes ............................................................................................................................................................ 36

9. Sustainable Delivery Statement – Summary Tables .............................................. 37

9.1 Objective 1 ........................................................................................................................................................... 37

9.2 Objective 2 ........................................................................................................................................................... 39

9.3 Objective 3 ........................................................................................................................................................... 40

9.4 Objective 4 ........................................................................................................................................................... 42

9.5 Objective 5 ........................................................................................................................................................... 44

9.6 Objective 6 ........................................................................................................................................................... 45

9.7 Objective 7 ........................................................................................................................................................... 47

9.8 Objective 8 ........................................................................................................................................................... 50

9.9 Objective 9 ........................................................................................................................................................... 51

9.10 Objective 10 ......................................................................................................................................................... 52

9.11 Objective 11 ......................................................................................................................................................... 52

9.12 Objective 12 ......................................................................................................................................................... 53

9.13 Objective 13 ......................................................................................................................................................... 53

9.14 Objective 14 ......................................................................................................................................................... 54

9.15 Objective 15 ......................................................................................................................................................... 55

9.16 Objective 16 ......................................................................................................................................................... 56

9.17 Objective 17 ......................................................................................................................................................... 58

Page 3 of 65

9.18 Objective 18 ......................................................................................................................................................... 61

9.19 Objective 19 ......................................................................................................................................................... 63

9.20 Objective 20 ......................................................................................................................................................... 65

Page 4 of 65

1. Executive Summary

The London Bridge Station Redevelopment Project, part of the Thameslink Programme, has transformed one of the capital’s most heavily used interchanges in a way that ensures its suitability as one of the UK’s landmark infrastructure interchanges for years to come. It’s the lynchpin of the Thameslink Programme, a programme that transforms north – south rail travel through central London.

Applying a holistic approach to all aspects of the project Network Rail, Costain and the Costain supply chain have collaboratively ensured that not only does the project create a lasting and unquestionable legacy for the capital and surrounding areas, but that it was delivered in a way that sets a blueprint for the delivery of major complex projects. The project was, at every level, incredibly complex and was;

• delivered in nine phases whilst maintaining the safe operation of the station (the country’s 4th busiest) and its surrounds, the train services, and ensuring continuing positive passenger and public experience within and around the station complex for the 50+ million passengers every year;

• sympathetic to its heritage – London Bridge is the oldest terminal station in London (first opened in 1836) and was originally two separate stations and thus retained the complexity and memory of the original layout;

• managed within an existing footprint surrounded by highways, hospitals, residential and commercial properties; and

• delivered in accordance with its planning conditions, two listed building consents, a Conservation Area Consent and an in-depth set of S106 obligations.

The project is, by its very nature, a sustainable development which has had a significant beneficial impact both to the surrounding area, the station and commuters and to and the Thameslink Programme as a whole.

The wider community will benefit from;

• An efficient transport hub – better connections to London Underground and London Bridge bus station

• Optimal connectivity - providing much needed extra capacity on the rail system - more than 80 new stations connected to the Thameslink network and London Bridge station.

• Optimal accessibility - the previous arrangement of the station did not assist passenger movements.

• Optimal urban connectivity - areas to the north and south of the station have now been connected in a more pedestrian friendly way. New entrances assist the regeneration of the area to the south.

• A programme of community engagement activities including, local supply chain, local employment and apprentice opportunities throughout the 6 years of development.

Page 5 of 65

Our investors will benefit from;

• Active energy efficient measures including a renewable energy generation system and a naturally ventilated concourse design that does not require heating or air conditioning and is designed to allow for as much natural lighting as possible - resulting in significant energy savings

• Increased capacity of the station resulting in estimated savings of 24 million kg of CO2 per annum resulting from the modal shift from the provision of new and improved rail services

• Increased station capacity of 65% - from 56 million passengers per year to 90 million

This report captures the sustainability themed achievements, and challenges, of the project from 2012 – March 2018. A further revision of this report will be issued in early 2019 to capture the final achievements of 2018.

In summary, the collaborative relationship between client and contractor encouraged the development and establishment of a considered and structured sustainability agenda, supported at the top of both Client and Principal Contractor organisations. A sustainability strategy, identifying objectives and targets, was developed by the Thameslink Programme and involved key criteria such as integrating LZC technology, developing Whole Life Case Studies and delivering carbon reductions. Examples of waste and emission reductions achieved include;

• The design of a naturally ventilated concourse that does not require heating or air conditioning and allows for as much natural lighting as possible, resulting in significant energy savings

• A geothermal energy pile system delivering carbon reductions of 6.1%, a first for Network Rail

• Intelligent control escalators that allow reduced energy use during station off-peak hours with annual savings of 36.46 tCO2e and over £9,000 in operational costs

• Use of reinforcement Steel with 98% recycled content that has delivered a 8,353 tCO2e saving.

• Installation of LED lighting in the majority of the station concourse to provide annual CO2e savings of around 235t

• Inclusion of active energy efficient measures in the final build including efficient lighting controls, high efficiency heat recovery, efficient air and water distribution, and regenerative technology and efficient control gear systems for lifts

Strong and consistent leadership around social value, advocating its value and requiring participation, particularly from the Programme Directors, was also key to our success in delivering a positive social impact to leave a social legacy beyond project completion. We developed a strategic approach to social value, which took account of:

• the specific impact and opportunities of the project;

• communities around the station; and

• priorities of local stakeholders.

Page 6 of 65

1.1 Sustainability Facts at a glance

Total m3 of waste produced (from start of project to Mar 18) 482,048

Total m3 of waste diverted from landfill (from start of project to Mar 18)

479,047

Total landfill diversion rate (from start of project to Mar 18) 99.4%

Total tonnes of carbon produced (from start of project to Mar 18)

Construction Carbon Savings (tCO2e)

Embodied Carbon Savings (tCO2e)

Annual Operational Carbon Savings (tCO2e)

6,337

1,687

8,354

396

Total m3 of water used (from start of project to Mar 18)

Total m3 water saved during construction

136,768

31,311

Total amount of money raised for charity

Our sustainability initiatives delivered;

Total construction cost savings (£262,247 annually, 5 year

construction period)

Annual operational cost savings

Approx. £100,000

£1,306,234

£115,445

Total number of community engagement events delivered/participated in

Over 150

Number of local job opportunities sustained for at least 6 months

55

Total number of apprentices 61

Number of training opportunities provided for local residents (CSCS and short courses)

203

Number of training opportunities provided for local residents (NVQs)

14

Total number of work experience placements provided/ hosted 48

Number of best practices produced 52

Number of external sustainability awards won/shortlisted (up to Aug 18)

27

Page 7 of 65

2. Purpose

2.1.1 The purpose of this document is to outline how the London Bridge Station Redevelopment Project (LBSRP) has met the Network Rail’s Thameslink Programme Sustainable Delivery Strategy (SDS) following its completion. It also provides important references to project close-out documentation in relation to the environmental management and compliance of the project through-out its lifecycle.

2.1.2 The diagram below illustrates the hierarchy of documentation to support close-out of the Thameslink Programme KO2 and the supporting projects.

3. Project Description

3.1.1 The Thameslink Programme is a £6 billion project in south-east England to upgrade and expand the Thameslink rail network to provide new and longer trains between a wider range of stations to the north and to the south of London without requiring passengers to change trains in London. Work included platform lengthening, station remodelling, new railway infrastructure, and additional rolling stock and thus provides a significant increase in railway capacity through Central London.

3.1.2 A major component the Thameslink Programme was the redevelopment and reconfiguration of London Bridge Station and significant changes to the western and eastern approaches.

3.1.3 London Bridge Station was the lynchpin of the Thameslink Programme, driven by the need to increase the number of through trains accommodated at the station and the need to meet the anticipated growth in passenger numbers. In addition to the delivery of a world-class transport interchange we created a grand new street level concourse providing new entrances onto Tooley Street and St Thomas Street. This gave the station a civic scale and a street presence appropriate for its importance, both within Southwark, and London. It provided a truly legible layout, allowing the station to feel like a single station for the first time. An upper-level terminus concourse, provided as part of the Shard development, provides convenient links out to the bus station and taxi rank The terminus concourse is linked to the main street level concourse via a dramatic, wedge-shaped four-storey high space.

TLP

EMM & SDS Close Out

Report

LBSRP

Costain Close Out Report

Railway Systems

BBRP

Close Out Report

Siemens

Close Out Report

BDU/SPP

Skanksa Close Out Report

HCI

Various

Outer Areas

Carillion

Close Out Report

UKPN

Close Out Report

Page 8 of 65

3.1.4 This SDS close out report will capture how well the LBSRP has delivered against the TLPs sustainability objectives, record other sustainability achievements made by the redevelopment and report on key environmental performance indicators.

4. Abbreviations & Definitions

4.1.1 Abbreviations or phrases used in this document :

Abbreviation or Phrase

CITB Construction Industry Training Board

CO2e Carbon Dioxide Equivalents

eB Thameslink Programme Document Management System

EMP Environmental Management Plan

FSC Forest Stewardship Council

GRIP Guide to Railway Investment Projects

hrs Hours

LBoS London Borough of Southwark

LBSRP London Bridge Station Redevelopment Project

m3 Cubic Metres

MOL Museum of London

MUP Materials Use Plan

NR Network Rail

NRMM Non Road Mobile Machinery

NSA National Skills Academy

PEFC Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification

RHI Renewable Heat Incentive

SDS Sustainable Delivery Statement

SME Small to Medium Enterprise

SUD Sustainable Urban Drainage

t Tonnes

TLP Thameslink Programme

WAV Western Approach Viaduct

WLC Whole Life Costing

Page 9 of 65

5. Documentation & Records

5.1 Summary

5.1.1 This section provides an overview and itemised list of final SDS related records generated from the LBSRP.

Title and Document Number Purpose Comments

GRIP Deliverables

Environmental Appraisal/Action Plan

N420-WSP-ERP-EN-000005

The purpose of the Environmental Appraisal/Action Plan was to identify potential environmental issues and risks that may arise during the design and construction of the LBSRP and to ensure that these were managed through the design process.

Closed: April 2010

Environmental Mitigation Schedule

N420-COT-ESC-EN-000001

The Environmental Mitigation Schedule detailed the environmental issues for the LBSRP and identified the associated mitigation to be implemented to effectively manage the issues. Mitigation was delivered on the whole, by the documents listed in this table.

Live: One open obligation – ‘to restore all land utilised for construction’ – this cannot be closed out until all highway reinstatement works are complete and Vinegar Yard handed back to NRP.

Environmental Aspects Register

N420-COT-PLN-EN-000001

The Environmental Aspects Register represented an overview of the environmental risks associated with the construction of the LBSRP. The methodology is in line with the International Environmental Management System standard ISO 14001. The initial aspects register was completed at the start of the project and was reviewed regularly.

Closed: The Environmental Aspects Register was closed in February 2018 and is now captured in the EMP (N420-COT-PLN-EN-000001).

Commitments Tracker

N420-NRT-SCH-CN-000010

The Commitments Trackers details all the regulatory commitments that apply to the LBSRP and identifies roles and responsibilities with regards to managing and discharging these commitments.

Closed: All commitments now closed

Design Environmental Management Plan

N420-WSP-ERP-EN-000004

The Design Environmental Management Plan established the framework for the management of environmental and sustainability requirements relating to the GRIP 5 design of the LBSRP. The document provided further detail on construction and design specific issues.

Closed: Document closed when the LBSRP went into construction phase in 2012.

Page 10 of 65


Physical Works Environmental Management Plan


The Environmental Management Plan (EMP) details the arrangements that have been put into place for the management of environmental matters during the construction phase of the LBSRP. The document complies with ISO 14001: 2015 and is a collaborative document between Network Rail and Costain. The document also conforms to the Network Rail ‘Contract Requirements Environment’ (N000-NRT-PRO-EN-000015).

Live: This EMP will remain live until project end. At the end of 2017/beginning of 2018, a number of topic specific control plans were effectively closed out and any residual actions captured within this overarching EMP.

Project Control Plans

Sustainable Delivery Statement

N420-COT-STM-EN-000001

The purpose of the Sustainable Delivery Strategy was to set out the way sustainability was to be achieved on the LBSRP. The document outlined the drivers for sustainability performance, the LBSRP commitment and strategy for meeting those requirements. It included relevant and specific objectives from the TLP Sustainability Strategy and from planning requirements applicable to the LBSRP. The document also stated target levels of performance against the various key performance indicators defined in the TLP Sustainability Strategy and proposed mechanisms for on-going monitoring and reporting.

Closed: Document closed in February 2018 and reported on in this SDS Close Out Report.

Site Waste Management Plan


The purpose of the Site Waste Management Plan was to assist the LBSRP to ensure that waste streams were appropriately identified, managed and documented, and waste documentation was collected and retained where necessary and as legally required.

Closed: Document closed in December 2017. SmartWaste will continue to be used to track waste management activities until project end. A final SWMP close out report, a declaration of conformity, will be produced in late 2018 following substantial completion.

Sustainable Procurement and Materials Plan


The Sustainable Procurement and Materials Plan set out the approach to be undertaken at the LBSRP regarding sustainable procurement and acted as guidance for all project teams. The document looked to follow the ‘Flexible Framework’ provided under BS8903: Principles and Framework for Procuring Sustainably, which guided procurement decision making and assessed progress. The document also satisfied and implemented the TLP Responsible Sourcing Policy and the Responsible Sourcing Procedure.

Closed: Document closed in February 2018.

Page 11 of 65


Material Use Plan


The Materials Use Plan was produced to ensure materials were procured in a sustainable manner for the LBSRP. The document assessed materials through a scoring system using set criteria which ensured a whole life approach was implemented. The information obtained for the document was provided by manufacturers/suppliers and allowed the project, in most circumstances, to compare options from specific material suppliers to determine which option was the most sustainable.

Closed: Document closed in December 2017.

Environmental Aspects Register


The Environmental Aspects Register represented an overview of the environmental risks associated with the construction of the LBSRP. The methodology was in line with the International Environmental Management System standard ISO 14001. The initial aspects register was completed at the start of the project and was reviewed regularly. Both the initial and subsequent assessments considered potential significant impacts associated with the construction works, start up, shut down, reasonably foreseeable situations and abnormal operating conditions, where possible.

Closed: Document closed in February 2018 and the register transferred to within the EMP (N420-COT-PLN-EN-000001).

Noise and Vibration Control Plan


The purpose of the Noise and Vibration Control Plan is to describe the measures to be taken to minimise the risk of noise and vibration related impacts as a result of work on the LBSRP. The aim is to mitigate adverse noise and vibration impacts and ensure compliance with the Section 61 consent and commitments made to stakeholders by reducing or controlling those aspects of construction that may result in high levels of noise and vibration. The document contains procedures to be followed for the Section 61 consent application process, noise and vibration monitoring and reporting, and actions to implement in the event there is an exceedance of the specified noise and vibration trigger levels.

Live: This document remains live whilst the Section 61 consent is active (30th Nov 2018).

Water Control Plan


The purpose of the Water Control Plan was to describe the measures that were considered and those that were implemented to enable the LBSRP achieve both water efficient practices and innovative solutions.

Closed: Document closed in August 2015 and merged into the Resource Efficiency Plan (N420-COT-PLN-EN-000007).

Page 12 of 65


Contaminated Land and Groundwater Protection Control Plan


The purpose of the Contaminated Land and Groundwater Protection Plan was to describe the measures to be taken to ensure that controls were implemented when work at the LBSRP was undertaken within or in proximity to land which may potentially be contaminated. A number of ground investigations were undertaken pre-main construction works which showed the typical contamination found on the site to be elevated levels of lead, mercury and arsenic. These contaminants had the potential to migrate downwards into the River Terrace Gravel Aquifer, as well leaching into the River Thames located approximately 100 m north of the site.

Closed: Document closed in February 2018. Relevant measures now captured in the Environmental Incident Control Plan (N420-COT-PLN-EN-000009).

Environmental Nuisance Control Plan


The purpose of the Environmental Nuisance Control Plan was to describe the measures to be taken to minimise the risk of environmental nuisance related pollution as a result of work on the LBSRP during the construction phase. Such nuisance related to the works consisted of dust, air quality, mud on the roads, lighting and odour/vermin.

Closed: Document closed in February 2018 and any residual actions captured in the EMP (N420-COT-PLN-EN-000001).

Heritage and Archaeology Management Plan


The purpose of the Heritage and Archaeological Control Plan was to set out the procedures and control measures for construction works carried out at the LBSRP, parts of which are grade II heritage listed, and in the vicinity of other listed buildings, to ensure protection of those listed structures and buildings.

Closed: Document was closed in February 2018.

Ecology and Biodiversity Control Plan


The purpose of the Ecology and Biodiversity Control Plan was to describe the measures to be taken to minimise the risk of damage to the ecology at the LBSRP and detail measures that were taken to minimise risks and mitigate any damage caused. Although the LBSRP worksite was not classed as an ecologically valuable or sensitive area, there were several aspects of the development that need to be examined to minimise any negative ecological impact.


Energy Control Plan


The purpose of the Energy Control Plan was to describe the measures that were considered and those implemented to enable the LBSRP achieve both energy efficient practices and innovative solutions.

Closed: Document closed in August 2015 and merged into the Resource Efficiency Plan (N420-COT-PLN-EN-000007).

Page 13 of 65


Green Travel Plan


The Green Travel Plan summarised several measures aimed at promoting greener, more efficient, travel choices with a specific emphasis on reducing all motorised vehicle journeys to and from the LBSRP worksite. The aim of the document was to reduce direct carbon emissions from the LBSRP and the associated impact on local stakeholders.


Environmental Incident Control Plan


The purpose of the Environmental Incident Control Plan is to set out the measures to be taken during a potential or actual environmental incident at the LBSRP. The document also details the reporting procedure to be followed after an incident. The document ensures that site works comply with all legal and contractual requirements and that in the event of an incident the impact to the environment and all those affected by the works is minimised as far as reasonably practicable

Live: This document will remain live until project end.

Social Sustainability and Community Investment Plan


The purpose of the Social Sustainability and Community Investment Plan was to ensure the LBSRP effectively engaged the local community and supply chain to provided skills development, employment and service/product procurement opportunities to leave a positive social legacy beyond project completion.

Closed: Document closed in December 2017.

Resource Efficiency Plan


The purpose of the Resource Efficiency Plan was to describe the measures that were considered and those implemented to enable the LBSRP to achieve both resource efficient practices and innovative solutions.


Trackers, Reports and Other Records

Resource Efficiency Savings Tracker

N420-COT-REG-EN-000012

The purpose of the Resource Efficiency Savings Tracker was used to identify resource efficiency initiatives implemented at the LBSRP and to calculate the cost and carbon savings that resulted from the initiative.

Closed: Tracker closed in January 2018 and key outcomes reported on in this SDS Close Out Report.

Page 14 of 65


Whole Life Costing Case Studies

N420-COT-REP-EN-000006

The Whole Life Costing (WLC) Case Studies document details the results of the WLC assessments (cost and carbon) of five key elements of the LBSRP: geothermal piles and heat pump; escalators; lifts; photovoltaic cells and; platform and concourse lighting. The calculations used in the WLC assessments are saved to the SDS Target Tracker (N420-COT-REG-EN-000004).

Closed: Document finalised in December 2017.

Sustainability Best Practices

N420-COT-REP-MD-000153

The Sustainability Best Practices document collates all the best practices produced on the LBSRP throughout the construction phase. These best practices cover environment, employment and skills, community engagement and charity giving initiatives implemented on the LBSRP.

Closed: Document finalised in December 2017.

Environmental and Social Dashboard Data Tracking Register


The Environmental and Social Dashboard Data Tracker is used to capture all data required to support the LBSRP sustainability ongoing reporting requirements (Costain and Network Rail).

Live: This tracker will remain live until project end to support ongoing reporting requirements.

Environmental Assurance Tracking Register


The Environmental Assurance Tracking Register was used to track all environmental assurance activities undertaken on the LBSRP, including formal audits and audits of subcontractors. The tracker also detailed any actions arising from those assurance activities.

Closed: This register was closed in May 2018.

Noise and Vibration Trigger Level Exceedance Register


The Noise and Vibration Trigger Exceedance Register is used to capture all exceedances recorded by the fixed noise and vibration monitoring network of monitors. This monitoring is a requirement of the Section 61 consent.

Live: This document remains live whilst the Section 61 consent is active.

Noise and Vibration Monitoring Reports


The LBSRP Section 61 consents required a programme of fixed noise monitoring throughout the period of construction; these documents are the monthly reports generated by the external consultants, Southdowns Environmental, for the site fixed monitoring programme.

Closed: Years 2012 – 2017

Live: 2018 monitoring ongoing until Nov 30th

Page 15 of 65


Section 61 Application (Phases 1 – 14)

N420-COT-CNT-CS-000001

Throughout the construction phase, the LBSRP sought Section 61 consents under the Control of Pollution Act 1974. The Section 61 consents were phased, with each phase typically covering a six month period. These documents represent the applications for the Section 61 consent.

Closed: Phase 1 – 13 closed

Live: Phase 14 (closes 30th November 2018).

Section 61 Consent Letter (Phases 1 – 14)

N420-COT-CNT-CS-000001

These documents represent the Section 61 consents granted by the London Borough of Southwark for the LBSRP.

Closed: Phase 1 – 13 closed

Live: Phase 14 (closes 30th November 2018).

Section 61 Consent Variations Register


The Section 61 Consent Variations Register is used to record the variations required.

Live: Variations may be required to the Phase 14 Section 61.

Noise Monitor Calibration Certificates

N420-COT-CRF-EN-000001

Calibration certificates for the fixed noise monitors detailed in the Section 61.

Closed

Vibration Monitor Calibration Certificates

N420-COT-CRF-EN-000002

Calibration certificates for the fixed vibration monitors detailed in the Section 61.

Closed

Phase 1 Temporary Rehousing Records


Various records associated with the phase 1 rehousing process including costing and example letters.

Closed

Phase 2 Temporary Rehousing Records


Various records associated with the phase 2 rehousing process including costing and example letters.

Closed

Secondary Glazing Records


Various records associated with the noise insulation/secondary glazing process including costing, example letters and close out reports.

Closed

Air Quality Trigger Level Exceedance Register


The Air Quality Trigger Exceedance Register is used to capture all exceedances recorded by the fixed air quality monitoring network of monitors.

Closed: This document was closed when the air quality monitoring programme was closed out in May 2018.

https://www.tlpeb.co.uk/TLPeB/Framework/Object.aspx?o=360097&t=3

https://www.tlpeb.co.uk/TLPeB/Framework/Object.aspx?o=360098&t=3

Page 16 of 65


Air Quality Monitoring Reports


The LBSRP Section 61 consents required a programme of fixed noise monitoring throughout the period of construction; these documents are the monthly reports generated by the external consultants, Southdowns Environmental, for the site fixed monitoring programme.

Closed: 2012 – 2018

This was closed when the air quality monitoring programme was closed out in May 2018.

Public Complaints Register


The Costain Complaints tracker was produced to provide complaint data for NR. Costain also input such data into its own ICE database but created this tracker for Networks Rails benefit.

Live: Will remain open until project completion.

SDS Target Tracker


Numerous trackers were maintained throughout the LBSRP in order to track and measure performance against the various SDS targets. These have been consolidated into one SDS Target Tracker – this consolidated tracker includes the following:

• Non Road Mobile Machinery (NRMM) – to capture compliance of machinery in use on site against engine emission standards

• Recycled Aggregate Tracker – to track % recycled aggregate used on LBSRP

• Top 10 Materials By Volume and Embodied Carbon – to identify top 10 materials and their associated embodied carbon to inform procurement decisions

• Small to Medium Enterprise (SME) Total Spend – to track project spend on local products and services

• Environmental Incident Register – to detail incidents and close calls recorded and reported in Costain Capture system

• Materials Deliveries – to capture distance travelled for deliveries to site


Page 17 of 65


• Heritage Asset Register – to detail all heritage assets and identify status (i.e. retained, demolished, salvaged, relocated etc.)

• WLC Case Studies Calculation worksheets – to capture the calculations used to develop the five project case studies in the WLC Case Study book (N420-COT-REP-EN-000006)

Sustainable Timber Chain of Custody Register


The Sustainable Timber Chain of Custody Register was used to capture details of timber procured for the construction phase of the LBSRP, including the chain of custody number (FSC/PEFC certificate number).


SDS Quarterly Reports


Performance against the SDS objectives and targets were reported on to NR on a quarterly basis. These reports provide updates on progress against these targets at the time of reporting. All the quarterly reports have been consolidated into one document.

Closed: Last quarterly report was submitted to NR in October 2017 – no further quarterly reports were considered necessary due to focus shifting to this SDS Close-out Report.

National Skills Academy Exit Report

N420-COT-REP-PM-000003

At the completion of the National Skills Academy, a formal exit report was required to be submitted to CITB for comment. This report detailed key achievements against the KPIs and any lessons learned.

Closed: Exit Report submitted to CITB for review in September 2017 and received back from CITB in December 2017.

Page 18 of 65

6. Environmental Key Performance Indicators

6.1 Carbon

Measure 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 Total Notes

Total carbon

(tonnes CO2e) 1,132 1,636 1,720 1,298. 547 6,337

Figures are lower for 2013/14 due to lack of data prior to period 6.

2017/18 figures lower due to switch to a Green Energy Tariff

Total hours worked 2,154,126 3,675,114 4,749,785 6,170,071 6,001,819 22,750,819

Total carbon /1,000 hours worked

0.53 tCO2e 0.45 tCO2e 0.36 tCO2e 0.21 tCO2e 0.09 tCO2e 0.28 tCO2e

Annual spend £88,040,043 £147,755,197 £195,765,972 £201,236,172 £178,732,929 £811,530,312

Total carbon

(tonnes CO2e/ per £1m project spend)

12.9 11.1 8.8 6.5 3.1 7.8

% comparison of target

tCO2e/million (baseline) n/a -13.74% -20.8% -26.58% -52.57% -39.29%

Target To reduce the amount of scope 1 and 2 emissions normalised by project spend year on year by 5% against the 2013/14 baseline

Target met

Page 19 of 65

Figure 1: Graph showing Scope 1 and 2 carbon produced on the project by period over each year.

Figure 2: Graph showing total Scope 1 and 2 carbon produced on the project by year against working hours.

Page 20 of 65

6.1.1 Electricity

Figure 3: Graph showing total electricity usage on the project by period over each year.

Figure 4: Graph showing total electricity usage per year against working hours.

Page 21 of 65

6.1.2 Diesel

Figure 5: Graph showing total diesel usage by year against working hours.

Page 22 of 65

6.2 Waste

Measure 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 Total Notes

Total waste (m3) 21,656 91,443 68,398 57,941 213,845 27,093 482,048 Quantity of Asbestos material was the reason for the lower

diversion rate in 2014/15. The high quantity of waste during 2016/17 is due to the large amount of excavation and demolition works occurring

during this period.

Diverted form landfill (m3)

21,502 90,999 66,962 57,739 213,102 27,093 479,047

To landfill (m3) 154 444 1,436 202 743 0 3,001

% diverted from landfill 99.3% 99.5% 97.9% 99.7% 99.7% 100% 99.4%

Target 95% landfill diversion rate

Target met

Page 23 of 65

Figure 6: Graph showing total waste diverted from landfill and waste sent to landfill against working hour by year.

Page 24 of 65

6.3 Water

Measure 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 Total Notes

Total office water used (m3)

4,286 7,722 10,957 13,372 12,483 48,820 Figures are lower for 2013/14 due to lack of data prior to period 6.

Site accommodation water saving features were established from site set up and thus it proved difficult to reduce consumption after that by means other than behaviour. Accommodation water increases are in line with hours worked.

Although the target set by Network Rail was for office water only, we have presented the data against the same target but for site water, which is a significantly higher quantity than office use. Although this shows significant reductions against the baseline, we cannot attribute this to a particular initiative.

Total site water used (m3)

17,753 18,009 18,100 20,867 13,209 87,938

Total water used (m3) 22,040 25,731 29,057 34,248 25,692 136,768

Total Hours worked 2,154,126 3,675,114 4,749,785 6,170,071 6,001,819 22,750,819

Total office water used (m3) per 100,000 hrs

199 210 231 217 208 214.59


(office water per 100,000 hrs baseline)

n/a 5.30% 13.74% 8.18% 4.33% 7.27%


(site water per 100,000 hrs baseline)

n/a -40.46% -53.70% -58.91% -73.26% -53.04%

Target Reduce the quantity of office water used by 5% over the projects life span against the 2013/14 baseline

Target not met

Page 25 of 65

Figure 7: Graph showing office water usage per period for each year of the project.

Figure 8: Graph showing office water used per year against working hours.

Page 26 of 65

6.4 Incidents and Close Calls

Measure 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 Total

Number of environmental incidents 2 7 3 7 2 2 24

Severity of incidents 2 Minor 6 Minor

1 Sig 3 Minor

1 Sig

6 Minor

1 Sig

1 Minor 2 Minor

Number of complaints 3 25 23 18 47 38 154

Type/detail of environmental complaint – Top 3

64% Noise

14% Highways

12% Other

60%Noise

24% vibration

16% other

77% Noise

9% Air quality

5%highways

60% Noise

15%Air quality

5% Highways

72% Noise

10% Behaviour

6% Highways

79% Noise

18% Behaviour

3% Highways

Number of environmental Close calls 49 375 310 323 722 833 2,612

Top 3 environmental close call topics

1. Contained Leak

2. Waste

3. Air quality

1. Waste

2.. Contained Leak

3. Oil storage

1. COSHH

2. Contained Leak

3. Waste

1. Contained Leak

2. COSHH

3. Waste

1 .COSHH

2. Waste

3. Air quality

1 .Waste

2. COSHH

3. Air quality

Target More close calls than incidents

Significant Environmental Events

2013/14 Breach of section 61 consent conditions (Working outside of agreed area) (See 6.5)

2015/16 Breach of section 61 consent conditions (Working outside of agreed hours) (See 6.5)

2016/17 Breach of section 61 consent conditions (Failure of permanent noise monitors) (See 6.5)

Page 27 of 65

Review of incident close call data at project close out identified variation in the way different members of the environment team have classified incidents and close calls. However, it is felt that the more significant events have been captured as incidents.

Figure 9: Graph showing total environmental incidents over the length of the project by type.

Figure 10: Graph showing incidents per year against working hours.

Page 28 of 65

The number of complaints increased in 2016/17 due to the scope of works changing to platforms 1 and 2 which resulted in the period of temporary rehousing for residents near the works.

Figure 11: Graph showing total number of complaints over the length of the project by type.

Figure 12: Graph showing total complaints per year against working hours.

Page 29 of 65

The higher quantity of close calls in recent years is likely because of the improved close call reporting system and switch to digital technology in 2016. There was also a focus on improving site wide reporting culture as reflected in the figures above.

Figure 13: Graph showing total close calls and observations over the length of the project by category.

Figure 14: Graph showing total close calls and observations per year against working hours.

Page 30 of 65

6.5 Legal Breaches

Measure 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 Notes

Number of legal breaches

0 1 0 1 1 1

4x S61 breaches. All reported to LBoS and remedial action employed. No enforcement action

taken.

1 of the 4 breaches was listed a minor because it was equipment failure that did not result in any complaints hence we are reported 3 significant

incidents, but 4 breaches.

Total fines incurred (£) 0 0 0 0 0 0 No fines incurred

Noise Abatement Notices served

0 0 0 0 0 0 No Noise abatement notices served

Page 31 of 65

7. Sustainable Delivery Statement Objectives – Achievements

7.1 Best Practice Case Studies

7.1.1 Throughout the project, 52 sustainability focused Best Practice case studies were produced.

7.1.2 The Best Practices highlight how the project looked to provide solutions and improvements to overall performance, not just for environmental reasons, but also, for example, to strengthen links with the local community.

7.1.3 Each Best Practice gives an overview of the innovation discussed, how it was implemented, its benefits and what targets it meets with regards to the SDS.

7.1.4 The Best Practice book can be found on eB: N420-COT-REP-MD-000153.

7.2 Whole Life Costing Case Studies

7.2.1 Five whole life costing (WLC) case studies were produced contributing to half of the TLP overall target of 10, under SDS objective 13: To understand the whole life cost implications of project and purchasing decisions.

7.2.2 The WLC case studies can be found on eB (N420-COT-REP-EN-000006) and cover the following:

1) Ground Source Energy Piles and Heat Pump

2) Escalators

3) Lifts

4) Photovoltaic (PV) Cells

5) Platform and Concourse Lighting (LED lights)

7.2.3 Each WLC study presents a discussion of:

• The options investigated.

• The savings (monetary and carbon) and/or other benefits.

• Payback period for the initiative.

7.3 Resource Efficiencies and Savings

7.3.1 The LBSRP was committed to maximising resource efficiency and implemented several efficiency measures within the design and construction phase.

7.3.2 The measures were recorded in the Resource Efficiency Tracker (N420-COT-REG-EN-000012), which was updated on a regular basis throughout the project.

7.3.3 The Resource Efficiency Tracker provided total project carbon, energy, water and cost savings associated with the various resource efficiency measures implemented during design and construction.

Page 32 of 65

7.3.4 A summary of the savings made via implementation of the resource efficiencies is provided in the table below:

Description Detail

Outgoing costs

Installation/ Purchase Costs – Operational Elements £935,019

Ongoing Maintenance Costs – Operational Elements £99,976

Installation/ Purchase Costs – Construction Elements £44,707

Savings – Carbon

Construction Carbon Savings (tCO2e) 1,687 tCO2e

Embodied Carbon Savings (tCO2e) 8,354 tCO2e

Annual Operational Carbon Savings (tCO2e) 396 tCO2e

(7,920 tCO2e over 20 years)

Savings – Energy

Annual Energy Savings During Construction (kWh) 1,290,601 kWh

Annual Operational Energy Savings (kWh) 1,260,038 kWh

Savings – Water

Water Savings During Construction (m3) 31,311 m3

Savings – Monetary

Cost savings to the Project During Construction

£1,306,234

(£262,247 annually, assuming 5 year construction period)

Annual Cost Savings for Operational Station £115,445

(£2,308,900 over 20 years)

Payback Periods

Operational Station Elements* ~9 years

Construction Elements** <0.5 years

* Total costs to payback = installation (purchase) + maintenance costs; Payback period = total costs / annual cost savings for operational station.

** Payback period = total cost of installation (purchase) / annual cost savings during construction.

See Resource Efficiency Tracker (N420-COT-REG-EN-000012) for assumptions made in calculating the various savings.

Page 33 of 65

7.4 National Skills Academy

7.4.1 The LBSRP joined the National Skills Academy (NSA) programme in 2013. The NSA was a project-based training concept led by Construction Industry Training Board (CITB) that was tailored to helping construction projects attract the required skills. It was a demand-led training model, which means the LBSRP determined the required skills. The aim of the NSA was to leave a skills legacy; people that have been trained on site will develop key capabilities, which they would not have acquired had the project not demanded them.

7.4.2 Fourteen specific NSA targets were developed for the LBSRP. These included targets relating to work placements, training, apprenticeships and construction careers awareness raising. These targets were reported on to CITB on a quarterly basis throughout the five years’ the LBSRP participated in the NSA.

7.4.3 The LBSRP participation in the NSA came to its planned end in June 2017. At completion, the LBSRP had achieved the following key NSA outcomes:

• Scored 100% performance against the key performance indicators.

• Supported 61 apprentice starts.

• Facilitated over 150 community engagement programmes, ranging from, educational site visits, apprentice workshops, pre-employment courses and weekly reading and maths volunteering at a local primary school.

• Hosted over 45 work experience placements.

7.4.4 Refer to the NSA Exit Report (N420-COT-REP-PM-000003) and the Sustainability Best Practice book (N420-COT-REP-MD-000153) for more details.

Page 34 of 65

7.5 Project Awards

7.5.1 The LBSRP received numerous awards in recognition of the various sustainability, community, health and safety initiatives and achievements. These awards are listed in the table below:

Award Description Awarding Body

2013

Bronze Considerate Constructors award Considerate Contactors Scheme

Gold ROSPA ROSPA

2014

Silver Considerate Constructors award Considerate Contactors Scheme

Highly Commended for Sustainability Good Practice – Carbon Costain

Gold ROSPA ROSPA

Thameslink Programme Sustainability Award – Highly Commended for Contaminated Soil Management Network Rail Thameslink Programme

2015

Thameslink Programme Sustainability Award – Social for Crossbones Gardens Network Rail Thameslink Programme

Thameslink Programme Sustainability Award – Environment for Sustainable Reinforcement Steel Network Rail Thameslink Programme

Partner of the Year award Bankside Open Spaces Trust

Mother Theresa award (Mick Caldwell/Community Relations) Bankside Open Spaces Trust

Silver Considerate Constructors award Considerate Contactors Scheme

Gold ROSPA ROSPA

2016

Highly Commended for the National Rail Awards (Sustainable Development)

Rail Magazine

Shortlisted for Costain Apprentice of the Year award (Billy Welch) Costain

Shortlisted Young Builder of the Year award (Billy Welch) Costain

Shortlisted for the CIWM ‘Most Sustainable Construction and Demolition Project’

CIWM

Gold Green Apple Award – Built Heritage The Green Council

Gold Considerate Constructors award Considerate Contactors Scheme

Silent Approach Award John Connell/ Noise Society

Best Practise Award, Resource Efficiency – For Eco Operator Training

Costain

Page 35 of 65

Award Description Awarding Body

2017


Gold International Corporate Social Responsibility Award The Green Council

Thameslink Programme Sustainability Award – Social for the Prostate Cancer Awareness Campaign

Network Rail Thameslink Programme

Thameslink Programme Sustainability Award – Environment for Platform Backfill (waste management)

Network Rail Thameslink Programme

Silver Green Apple Award – Environmental Best Practice The Green Council

Greatest Contribution to London Institute of Chartered Engineers (ICE)

2018


Shortlisted for ‘Sustainability

Won ‘Civils Project of the Year’ Construction Excellence

Shortlisted for ‘Sustainable Project of Year’ Construction News

Shortlisted for; (winners not yet announced)

Transport Project of the Year

Community Project of the Year

Health and Wellbeing Initiative of the Year

British Construction Industry Awards (winners not yet announced)

‘Overall Winner’

‘Transport and Infrastructure Winner’

‘Sustainability Winner’

New London Architecture

‘Greatest Contribution to London’

Institute of Civil Engineers

Shortlisted for ‘Sustainability’ (winners not yet announced) National Transport Awards

8. Sustainable Delivery Statement Objectives – Lessons Learned

8.1 Lessons Learnt Workshop

8.1.1 A workshop was carried out in summer 2018 with both Network Rail and Costain staff to identify key challenges and successes experienced during the LBSR, with the aim to feed into current and future projects within the Thameslink Programme and the wider company. The full lessons learnt have been captured in the Lessons Learnt Workshop Report (N420-NRT-REP-CN-000020). Some of the key aspects are also summarised below.

Page 36 of 65

8.2 Challenges

8.2.1 The challenges were analysed, scored and ranked by criticality. Please see table below of rankings, showing the “top” scoring challenges.

No. Challenge Description

1 Unattended environmental monitors

2 Meeting s.106 targets – sustained employment

3 Proximity to sensitive receptors in a changing work site

4 NR procedural mechanisms – electrical vehicle charging points/ RHI/ lifts

5 Material Use Plan

6 KPI reporting

7 Quality of imported recycled aggregate

8 Quality of WLC reports

9 Delayed installation of smart meters

10 Waste segregation

11 Community projects

8.3 Successes

No. Success Description

1 Temporary rehousing

2 s.61 Process and Noise Mitigation

3 External benchmarking

4 Best practice booklet

5 EST and community engagement/creating a social legacy

6 Green energy tariff/smart meters

7 Reduced kVA

8 RHI

9 Restoration of heritage features

10 Close Call stations

11 External recognition

12 Close call charitable donations

13 Soil management and contamination profiling

14 Stakeholder consultation and management

Page 37 of 65

9. Sustainable Delivery Statement – Summary Tables

The following tables provide details of achievements, challenges and lessons learned against each of the SDS targets set for the LBSRP.

9.1 Objective 1

Attract and retain the right people to work on TLP and grow the skills and capabilities needed to successfully deliver the outputs and strengthen succession plans for roles in the future:

SDS Target Achievements Challenges & Lessons Learned

1a

Carry out TLP and site-specific employee engagement surveys and develop action plans to respond to issues raised

Employee engagement surveys were completed on the project in September 2014, 2016 and 2017. These surveys are championed by the Project Director.

Engagement surveys were corporately driven by Costain, rather than being project specific and hence the project had little control over this. This target added little value at project level.

1b Provide introductory sustainability training to all employees and advanced training specific to role

All people starting on the project undertake a site induction which includes a section on environment and heritage. Regular CITB Site Environmental Awareness Training Scheme (SEATS) sessions are held for project personnel – 15 sessions (totalling 100 attendees) have been delivered on the project, with the last two SEATS sessions held in 2017 (January and September).

The induction package should be reviewed and updated on a regular basis (at least 6-monthly) to ensure that the content is relevant to the stage of the project.

A guide to sustainability/ environmental good practice when working on a construction site should be provided to all new-starters – this should be a handy pocket guide that can be kept with operatives and easily referred to when needed. Similar to the various safety related cards that are provided to new-starters.

1c

Develop TLP workforce training and development plan to bridge skill gaps and meet succession plans

A training matrix was developed by Costain – this detailed mandatory and recommended training for all Costain project roles. In addition, all Costain staff have Personal Development Plans developed with their line managers and career development reviews are formally carried out on an annual basis.

The project was also part of the National Skill Academy from 2012 – 2017. As part of this, all contractors and subcontractors sent quarterly updates to the Project Skills Co-ordinator of their training matrix and plans.

The above enabled the project team to identify any skill or training gaps.

This target relates to a corporate system and not a project specific system, hence the project had little control over this. This target did not add any value at project level. The exception being participation in the National Skills Academy – this was driven at the project level and did add value to the project.

Page 38 of 65


1d

80% of new starters to have undertaken all mandatory induction training sessions within 1 month of joining

It was a mandatory requirement that all new starters undertake induction training before they are permitted to commence work on the project. This was either a building induction (for office staff only) delivered by the facilities team, or a site induction (for site workers) delivered by a member of the SHE team.

As of 31st July 2018, over 18,750 staff had been inducted since project commencement in 2012.

The project achieved 100% against this target.

By making it mandatory to undertake the training before employees are permitted to work on the project meant that the project could achieve 100% against this target with no constraints.

1e Develop communication tools to deliver a consistent message to all workers on a single site

All members of the project received a standard project Induction which included a section on the environment and heritage. Other forms of communication used on the project included:

• Start of shift briefings (day and night shifts)

• TV screens and Close Call stations displaying videos and messages

• Monthly team briefings

• Tool box talks on a range of issues

• Posters around the office

• Project newsletter

• All-staff email communications

The close call stations were deemed best practice and are recommended to future projects. These stations were located throughout the project site so anyone could capture a close call at any time. The stations meant close call data was electronically captured so removed the need for manual entry of hand written reporting cards for data analysis. The project received over 2,000 close calls per month (on average).

Page 39 of 65

9.2 Objective 2

To recognise that diverse opinions and inclusive behaviour are vital to enable us to fully maximise the potential of our people and our programme:

SDS Target Achievements Challenges & Lessons Learned*

2a Develop and roll out TLP Diversity and Inclusion Plan

For the duration of the project, Costain maintained a Diversity and Equality Policy and in 2017 launched the new Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Strategy – the project contributed to this policy and strategy.

The Costain diversity and Inclusion plan was corporately driven and not project specific and hence the project had little control over this. This target did not add any value at project level.

2b Monitor complaints, grievance and whistle blowing issues

Costain maintain a whistle blowing hotline across all projects – the phone number of which is printed on project personnel access cards. Grievance and whistle blowing procedures sit firmly within the HR remit, however, the CRM was made aware and has carried out investigations on behalf of the HR department.

The Costain whistleblowing hotline and grievance procedure is a corporate system driven and not project specific and hence the project had little control over this. This target did not add any value at project level.

2c Monitor diversity of employees in post, job applicants and applicants for promotions

This was not managed at project level, however, as a company, Costain record the diversity of employees when they join the company. Costain has a clear long-term goal to have a workforce that is representative of society and has a goal of achieving the FTSE 100 target of at least 33% of our executive pipeline positions filled by women by 2020. Costain is also committed to the FTSE 250 target to have at least one BAME (Black, Asian or Minority Ethnic) board director by 2024.

This is a corporate system and not project specific and hence the project had little control over this. This target did not add any value at project level.

2d Train our employees to implement best practice recruitment techniques

Interview training is available to all Costain staff via the Costain MyLearning tool. Costain has a formal recruitment process whereby all roles must be advertised internally before going external. A standard interview question form with scoring is used for all Costain interviews. Any interview must have at least two interviewers. Interview training is also available to all managers recruiting staff.

This is a corporate system and not project specific and hence the project had little control over this. This target did not add any value at project level.

* The targets under this objective would be better placed as part of the tendering process rather than project specific as they are all corporate system level, with no project specific variations.

Page 40 of 65

9.3 Objective 3

Encourage our employees to exhibit the right behaviours and work with our suppliers to promote good practice in design and construction so that everyone returns home safety at the end of every day:


3a Offer an annual basic health assessment to employees working on site for 12 months or more

All project staff, contractors and subcontractors, were offered a health assessment no matter how long they had been working on the project. A full-time nurse was employed on the project – this position provided these confidential assessments. The availability of these health assessments was promoted in the site induction and regular emails.

Regular health campaigns were delivered across the project – the following were delivered in 2017:

• Occupational noise and dust exposure

• Diet and wellbeing

• Mental health awareness

• Hand and arm vibration syndrome

• Men and women’s health

The project achieved silver in the Costain Health Maturity Matrix in 2017. The aim of the matrix is to raise the standard across all Costain contracts with regards to on site health and wellbeing.

When you have a large workforce on a static site over a period of years, having on site-based nurse is highly recommended.

3b Deliver training to up skill our First Aiders to meet best practice recommendations

Accredited First Aid training was provided to interested personnel to ensure there were sufficient numbers of people trained on site and in the office. Posters of the accredited First Aiders were displayed around site and the office – site first aiders also had a first aid green cross on their hard hats. As of December 2017, 67 people on the project were trained First Aiders.

In 2017, the project commenced providing accredited Mental Health First Aid training to interested project personnel. As of December 2017, 11 people on the project were trained Mental Health First Aiders. Posters of the accredited Mental Health First Aiders were displayed around site and in the office.

3c Monitor/report HSA data across; implement improvement plans to address any performance issues

HSA data is reported to NR via the KPI tool and to Costain via the ‘Capture System’ and a project dashboard was maintained thought out the project.

Trends were identified and campaigns targeted to tackle the issues identified, for example;

Page 41 of 65


• Exclusions Zones (June 2017): an increase in the number of close calls relating to inadequate exclusion zones, breaching of exclusion zones etc. was identified so a campaign was run throughout the month to raise awareness.

• Manual Handling (July 2017): campaign run in response to close calls identifying unsafe manual handling techniques being used across the site.

• Hand Arm Vibration Syndrome (HAVS) (January 2017): campaign run throughout the month in response to receiving close calls indicating some operatives may be using vibratory equipment for prolonged periods.

Page 42 of 65

9.4 Objective 4

To maximise and report on the social value generated by TLP through local employment & skills, local supply chains and community engagement:


4a Include security and trespass, and best practice site access controls in design and development reviews

Security and trespass have been considered in the design. Early in the project a number of workshops were held with interested parties from NR & British Transport Police (BTP) and the N231 London Bridge Project design team. Where necessary the third parties have been informed of any changes as the design progressed. The key areas of design for security are:

• Counterterrorism:

A blast risk assessment was undertaken by NR; which informed the design team and a set of design blast threats were derived by MFD to design to. The station structure has been enhanced so that injuries in a blast are minimised.

• Physical and electronic security:

The Project Design Specification (PDS) and a number of Standard documents were produced by NR & BTP. WSP produced the document N420-WSP-ERP-MD- 000001-2.0 “GRIP 5 Security Design Requirements Specification”. This document was issued and reviewed four times by NR and subsequently signed off as the design guide for the GRIP 5 design. The design has continued to evolve, generally in line with the original document, although some design changes have occurred mainly through Train Operator Companies (TOC) requests. The security alarm systems have been designed to provide the levels of security as outlined in the strategy.

The inclusion of security and trespass is inherent in the design and was not influenced by this target.

All the security documents are; or should be restricted/ controlled, and thus are not specifically referenced here.

4b

Build security and trespass considerations into design and development reviews as a standard requirement

See response to Objective 4a above. Viewed as a supplication of Target 4a.

4c

Promote safety message regularly by carrying out 12 community initiatives, such as school visits, across the programme per annum

This target was met by the project with 13 events in 2016 and 18 in 2017, noting records of such events were not kept prior to August 2015. See Section 7.1 for further breakdown of achievements against this target.

The Community Relations Manager and Project Skills Coordinator delivered bespoke packages to two local junior mixed infant schools that were in proximity to the project. Three differing presentations (and physical interactions) were held for years 2, 4 and 6 meaning that as the children progressed through the school they were never given the same presentation twice. Snowfields and Tower Bridge Schools worked very closely with

Prior to August 2015, records of community related events and initiatives were not kept, therefore actual numbers of community and social related events is much higher than reported on in this SDS Close Out Report.

Page 43 of 65


project staff to allow Costain and Network Rail volunteers to interact with the children whilst assisting with school initiatives and the delivery of safety messages.

The LBSRP also forged strong links with a number of secondary schools and colleges to provide opportunities for students to interact with staff, dealing with issues of safety, training and employment.

Over the life of the project (since records commenced being kept from August 2015), the following was achieved:

• Coordinated or held over 150 community engagements, including 29 events with an educational focus and eight events in the local neighbourhood.

• Hosted 48 work experience student placements.

It is highly recommended that social and community related targets are clearly identified at project commencement and mechanisms established to collect, analyse and track the necessary data in order to continuously assess performance against these targets.

Page 44 of 65

9.5 Objective 5

To deliver a social legacy of employment, skills and training to individuals within communities around TLP works:


5a All contractors to produce Employment, Skills & Training (EST) plans and share with local agencies

The project developed a Social Sustainability and Community Investment Plan (N420-COT-PLN-EN-000016) that covered employment, skills and training. Relevant roles were shared with local agencies.

5b

Monitor number of job applicants, apprenticeships and training opportunities by residency and previous employment status

Employment and training numbers were monitored by the Project Skills Coordinator as part of the projects’ involvement in the National Skills Academy. Key project achievements being:

• Apprenticeships: Employed 61 apprentices

• Training opportunities: Provided 95 operatives with training

• Residency and employment status: Employed 55 local Southwark residents who were previously unemployed (and they remained in employment on the project for more than 26 weeks)

5c Achieve s106 targets for local employment, training and apprenticeships across LBAP

Local Employment - Overall – 55 sustained 26-week job opportunities against a target of 118 - thus the project failed to meet this target.

The project exceeded the target in year 1 but fell short in years 2, 3, 4 and 5. In years 3 and 4 performance fell under 50% of the target and subsequently the TLP incurred a fine for under performance in year 4 (a fine was avoided in year 3 as other parts of the TLP performed better and thus overall, the TLP achieved at least 50% of the target in year 3).

Apprenticeships - The project employed 61 apprentices (target was 24 and thus the target was exceeded.

Training

• 88 CCS training opportunities and 115 short courses delivered – 203 training opportunities in total (target was 165 and was thus exceeded)

• 14 NVQs provided (Target was 8 and was thus exceeded)

The overall target for local employment was based solely on labour forecasts for the project as a whole, rather than by phase of work. This meant the overall target was split fairly evenly for each of the 5 years and it became very difficult to find entry level roles towards the later years of the project and hence the project failed to meet this target.

In addition, there was a limited pool of candidates that met the criteria for the local employment target – combined with multiple projects competing for these candidates, achieving this target proved problematic.

Page 45 of 65

9.6 Objective 6

To provide local suppliers with the fair opportunity to compete for supply chain opportunities:


6a

All contractors to produce Procurement Plan to identify opportunities for SMEs and local suppliers and how these will be communicated

The project implemented a Sustainable Procurement and Materials Plan (N420-COT-PLN-EN-000011).

6b Monitor SME and local supplier participation within procurement processes across TLP supply chain

Since 2012, the project spent a total of just over £5millon pounds (to date: April 2018) with local Southwark companies, these companies being:

• Crofton Consulting Engineers – £100

• Bourne Steel - £406,924.52

• Speedy Hire - £1,558,805.00

• Mango Couriers - £11,018.00

• HGF Furniture Ltd - £2,500.00

• Macai Projects Ltd - £100,00.00

• Hilti - £1,388,122.98

• Travis Perkins - £103,387.87

• South London Timber - £2,131,803.10

• Cleanovation - £1,221,700.21

• Leyland SDM - £19,292.15

Total Local SME Spend = £9,643,653.83 (as of April 2018)

6c

Achieve s106 targets for supply chain seminars and SME and local supply chain participation across LBAP contracts

There were five ‘meet the buyer’ events held:

1. 28/11/2012: Meet the buyer event – hosted by Costain.

2. 29/01/2013: Achilles/Link Up – Representatives from NR and Siemens gave

presentations on how to become Achilles/Link Up approved and the benefits of

this. Around 40 Southwark firms (including some labour agencies) attended.

3. 06/08/2013: Meet the buyer event – held with five Tier 1 suppliers. The list of

businesses/SMEs was derived from the Southwark Business Directory, Link Up

Page 46 of 65


and (in order to keep continuity) the list from previous events. Invites were sent

to 67 business based in Southwark with seven attending. Costain issued a

tender to one of these companies who declined as they were only able to

provide a very small proportion of the scope of works and services that formed

the project requirements.

4. 10/12/2013: Supply Southwark Workshop – was attended by approximately

ten companies. At the event, the companies were presented with the

prequalification requirements and processes for tendering for work with Costain

and NR. In addition, they were made aware of the potential tendering

opportunities with the presentation of two procurement schedules that identify

the packages of work to be tendered and the awarded packages with respective

appointed subcontractors. Costain and NR representatives attended and

participated in the event.

5. 07/05/2014: Meet the buyer – with Supply Cross River – 70 SMEs attended

this event with nine of those Southwark based businesses. Costain met 12

companies and one of these was ARC UK who was one of the nine Southwark

companies listed

Although there was one further meet the buyer event to hold to meet the S106 target of

6, the London Borough of Southwark have discharged Network Rai and thus Costain

from this obligation. See letter from the London Borough of Southwark discharging this

procurement obligation - N403-LBS-INC-CN-000001.

Page 47 of 65

9.7 Objective 7

To pro-actively engage with communities around TLP to minimise negative impact and to work in partnership to maximise our social contribution:


7a

Monitor trends in complaints, informal stakeholder feedback, press and social media coverage to develop and implement improvement action plans

Public complaints could be directed to the project from a number of different sources, including directly to the project Community Relations Manager (CRM), or to the project team via the Local Council or the NR Help Desk hotline.

In all instances, the complaint information given to the CRM was recorded in full on the Costain Incident, Complaints and Enquiries (ICE) register. This register was the main recording register for all complaints and detailed how the complaints were addressed. As the tracker contained personal data (from which the complainant could be identified), only a small number of individuals had access to it, however, to ensure that NR were kept abreast of all details, a NR complaints tracker was also maintained so that the complaint type and actions/results were available to all.

See Section 6.4 for an overview of complaints received.

Three complaint trackers had to be maintained, 1) by the CRM at project level, 2) by the NR Community Relations Managers at TLP programme level and 3) by the CRM in the Costain capture system –this was time consuming and prone to a mismatching of data – a more streamlined approach should be considered/investigated to avoid this.

7b

Establish public information points for each site

Register all worksites operating for over 3 months for the CCS and achieve an excellent score as a minimum (40+) with a stretch target to achieve exceptional standard (45 and above)

The site is registered with the Considerate Constructors Scheme and is proud to display its literature and signage at the access points to the site and other areas of significance around the project. The project has been recognised with the following CCS awards:

• 2013: Bronze

• 2014: Silver

• 2015: Silver

• 2016: Gold (45/50) – exceptional standard

• 2017: Gold (45.5/50) – exceptional standard

• 2018: 45/50) – exceptional standard

In addition, the Community Relations Manager distributed monthly project update newsletters to all local residents and businesses. This newsletter advised of upcoming works, road and footpath closures etc. Where necessary, bespoke letters were delivered to affected residents and businesses. The Community Relations Manager also held weekly community drop-in clinics throughout a period of the project when works were most likely to create public nuisance (i.e. first half of 2017). The clinic was open after working hours on a recurring day each week.

It is recommended that stakeholder contact lists are updated on an annual basis to ensure any new residents and/or businesses within the project catchment area are included on the project newsletter distribution list.

Only four people utilised the community drop-in clinic over the several months that it was held. It was found that most members of the public made contact with the Community Relations Manager via email in the first instance and, to a lesser extent, by phone. Therefore, electronic media should be considered as the primary form of communicating with the public on future projects.

Page 48 of 65


7c Hold annual charity fundraising event(s) open to all TLP and delivery partners

The project has held numerous charity fundraising events – with at least one event per year. The project raised and/or donated £80,385.66* for various charities to date (noting, the true figure greater than this, however, prior to 2015 no data was recorded/can be found).

In 2016, the project raised £6,809 for Prostate Cancer UK through a month long campaign. In 2017, the project raised over £1,420 for Age UK and £255 for Cancer Research – in 2017, over £37,000 was raised and/or donated to charities. Refer to the Sustainability Best Practice book for more information on charitable giving efforts throughout the project (N420-COT-REP-MD-000153).

7d To implement Green Travel Plans during construction and for operation of London Bridge Station

A Green Travel Plan (N420-COT-PLN-EN-000014) was implemented throughout the project (plan now closed). This plan detailed measures aimed at promoting greener, more efficient, travel choices with a specific emphasis on reducing all motorised vehicle journeys to and from the project worksite. As part of the annual review of this plan, a green travel survey was undertaken using a survey monkey questionnaire to all project staff – the results of this survey are summarised in the Green Travel Plan. The results of these surveys can generate CEEQUAL points, where applicable.

7e Hold one community open day per year for each of our projects

This target was met with the LBSRP holding five site visit tours for local residents, schools and other organisations (such as representatives from CEEQUAL and other construction projects) in 2015, 13 in 2016 and 17 in 2107. Noting, records of community and social events were not maintained prior to August 2015.

Refer to the Sustainability Best Practice book for more information on community days throughout the project (N420-COT-REP-MD-000153).

Prior to August 2015, records of community related events and initiatives were not kept, therefore actual numbers of community and social related events is much higher than reported on in this SDS Close Out Report.

It is highly recommended that social and community related targets are clearly identified at project commencement and mechanisms established to collect, analyse and track the necessary data in order to continuously assess performance against these targets.

7f

Deliver an annual community improvement project in partnership with local business or community groups

This target was met with the LBSRP undertaking the following community improvement projects:

• Snowsfields Primary School Minibeast Mansion – creating a minibeast mansion (bug hotel) in the school garden (2013)

• ARK Globe Academy – Go4Set programme over 10 weeks to inspire students to enter science and engineering careers (2014)

Being a static construction site over a period of several years gave the project a unique opportunity to develop long-term meaningful relationships with the surrounding community and is recommended to be adopted by other project is such a situation.

Page 49 of 65


• Wildlife Week with ‘Putting Down Roots’ – raising awareness of importance of pollinators by creating pollinator gardens in the public garden space (2015)

• Red Cross Way – reinvigorating a local derelict old burial ground by creating a green space (2015)

• National Apprenticeship Week – visting local schools and hosting students onsite to undertake skills trainings to promote apprenticeships as a career option (2016)

• Snowsfields Primary School Garden – reinvigorating the school garden to create a green space for the students (2017)

Refer to the Sustainability Best Practice book for more information on community improvement projects throughout the project (N420-COT-REP-MD-000153).

Targeting delivering smaller community projects but more frequently proved more beneficial and successful than targeted one or two larger community projects.

Page 50 of 65

9.8 Objective 8

To identify and manage sites during construction where heritage is to be maintained and enhanced:


8a

Maintain register of heritage assets, seek to reuse/salvage assets where practical and beneficial and carry out and publish records of all assets lost.

Listed heritage assets within the project footprint are protected in line with the associated listed building consents and a heritage asset register is maintained detailing location, protection status and relocation information (where relevant) of all heritage assets (not just listed assets) – the asset register is appended to the project SDS consolidated target tracker (N420-COT-REG-EN-000004). The Heritage and Archaeology Control Plan (N420-COT-PLN-EN-000003) also provides details of these assets along with requirements for implementing ‘heritage control measures’, to ensure compliance with planning and listed building consents, reduce the impact of the construction work on the listed building, and prevent damage to designated heritage assets.

Various heritage assets have been salvaged as follows:

• V2 rocket from 84 Tooley St donated to Ripple Down.

• The parapet, iron staircase and stone arch portal from 84 Tooley donated to the Vale of Rheidol railway museum.

• The train shed roof, ten of the upright columns and ten of the foliate spandrels (decorative angle pieces) from the train shed donated to a new locomotive museum in Aberystwyth.

Some other heritage assets have been relocated within the station, such as the war memorial, which is now located in the new concourse.

Three heritage assets were demolished as part of the project: 84 Tooley St, the train shed roof and the railway arches/viaduct. Prior to demolition, these assets were catalogued, photographed and a 3D fly through generated to ensure a permanent record of each asset. These were deposited with MOL.

The LBSRP has also successful in gaining three grants from the Railway Heritage Trust towards heritage works at London bridge Station;

• £250,000k in 2015/16 for the brick cleaning and repair of the St Thomas st listed façade

• £250,000 in 2016/17 for the brick cleaning and repair of the Tooley St and Bermondsey St facades and the restoration of the Warren Truss listed structure

• £171,300 for 2017/18 for the quadripartite arch restoration

Donations of redundant materials must be in compliance with the National Supply Chains ‘Disposal of redundant assets Management Policy’ which includes the ‘gifting’ of unlisted heritage assets. Although a simple process, it took several weeks for the paperwork to get signed by the appropriate authority and thus future projects should seek to obtain the necessary signatures with plenty of time in its programme. Future projects should also consider the delivery of gifted assets as many charities will request that the asset also be delivered to them.

Page 51 of 65

9.9 Objective 9

To optimise the passenger experience in access and use, for all groups of people, during both construction and post construction to make best use of the improved transport facilities and service:


9a

To set and deliver targets to raise passenger awareness of TLP benefits and service disruption

n/a at project level – for TLP NR Communications team

9b

Achieve best practice targets for provision of passenger information systems in the final station design

The design for the Customer Information System completed follow NR standards for accessibility.

Wayfinding Operational Concept accepted by TOCs and NR.

Operational Information Screens (OIS) approved to provide enhanced passenger comms, designed in to provide local control a first for an NR managed station and contribute to inclusive messaging/comms.

9c

To deliver an inclusive design action plan to meet interoperability standards & the Equalities Act 2010

The project is subject to the requirements of the Common Safety Method (CSM) risk assessment which is a framework that describes a common mandatory European risk management process for the rail industry (to deliver interoperability); this is in turn supported by technical specification instructions (TSI) of which one, the Persons of Restricted Mobility, TSI is of relevance here.

The final station design delivers a range of positive impacts; by its very nature the redevelopment is bringing a 180 year old station up to current standards in accordance with the ‘Design Standard for Accessible Railway Stations’ Code of Practice (ACoP). In line with each phasing stage a review process against the ACoP (which translates the requirements of the PRM TSI) is carried out by an architectural access consultancy specialising in inclusive design; thus far 10 reviews have been undertaken which has identified a high degree of compliance (Stage 4 review - N420-COT-RWEP-AR-000051).

A Diversity Impact Assessments (DIA) has also been completed (N420-NRT-ASS—CN-100013). A DIA is the method used by Network Rail to clearly demonstrate that we have paid due regard to our duties within the Equality Act 2010. The DIA is a tool that helps NR confirm that our policies and the way we design, build and operate will work for everyone.

The requirement to undertake a DIA came to London Bridge Station in mid-2016 – very late into the design process and as such it was a retrospective assessment. That said, the NR Diversity and Inclusion Manger was been a key consultee throughout the design process and long before the DIA process was established.

Page 52 of 65

9.10 Objective 10

To improve the performance of the Thameslink route as a result of TLP investment:


10a Achieve Programme PPM targets during construction

This was a Network Rail Thameslink programme target, not project specific. N/A

10b Validate that the infrastructure can support the Programme PPM targets post construction.


9.11 Objective 11

To reduce the cost of delivery of TLP:


11a Achieve TLP efficiency target This was a Network Rail Thameslink programme target, not project specific. N/A

Page 53 of 65

9.12 Objective 12

To use CEEQUAL to help us strike a balance to achieve high standards of environmental and social benefits whilst achieving value for money:


12a

Achieve CEEQUAL target of Excellent for civils projects

The Western Approach Viaduct (WAV) component of the project was awarded CEEQUAL Excellent with a score of 92.4%.

The Main Station component of the project has been assessed as achieving CEEQUAL Excellent; internal assessors have scored this as ‘Excellent’ with a score (as of July 2018) of 95.6% but verification and ratification will not take place until late 2018.

Starting early on the assessment before knowledge base leaves the project.

Identify questions that will need currently untracked evidence and develop a process to capture this evidence.

12b Achieve CEEQUAL target of ‘Very Good’ for the Track & Signalling term contracts

N/A to this project N/A

9.13 Objective 13

To understand the whole life cost implications of project and purchasing decisions:


13a

Identify opportunities for 10 whole-life costing studies across TLP covering high impact and/or priority processes and materials

Five whole-life costing case studies for the project have been developed: lifts; escalators; photovoltaic cells; GHSP; LED lighting. These case studies have been collated into a book: N420-COT-REP-EN-000006.

The case studies were developed early in the project and were found to be in various formats and levels of detail. A case study format should be established early on to ensure consistency in presentation and level of content.

Page 54 of 65

9.14 Objective 14

To identify opportunities to implement new technologies and processes to future proof the rail network against climate change:


14a To identify technologies and processes that will future proof the rail network against climate change


Page 55 of 65

9.15 Objective 15

Minimise the use of natural resources, water and carbon while increasing the life of materials and avoiding the generation of waste:


15a

To deliver energy and carbon reductions in line with project targets and to monitor and report progress in line with the TLP Carbon Policy

This target has been met as the project delivered year on year energy/carbon savings well above the 5% target set for the project – see Section 6.1, 7.3 and the Sustainability Best Practice book (N420-COT-REP-MD-000153) for more details.

In addition, just through procuring reinforced steel with a 98% recycled content, the project reduced the embodied carbon content of the top ten materials used by the project by 15.6% (against the industry standard baseline) – therefore, exceeding the 5% target set for the project – refer to the Resource Efficiency Plan (N420-COT-PLN-EN-000007) and the Sustainability Best Practice book (N420-COT-REP-MD-000153) for more details.

*It is highly recommended that at project commencement any carbon/energy related sustainability targets are clearly understood and that the necessary mechanisms are established to collect, track and analyse the relevant data to continuously assess performance against the targets. Doing this retrospectively can prove problematic and time consuming.

Switching to a green energy tariff generated carbon savings and should be considered at project commencement. For this project, switching saved around 650 tCO2e/year, but as the switch was made at the end of the project, higher savings were not realised.

Money can also be saved by simply monitoring electricity usage and adjusting electricity purchased/ supplied accordingly. This should be done annually as a minimum. Use of an energy broker to manage this process is also recommended – Costain utilised Energy and Carbon Management Ltd to broker all power supply agreements so each supply agreement is reviewed and renegotiated on an annual basis.

Our analysis (section 7.3.4) shows that constructions related sustainability initiatives have a shorter payback periods that many operational initiatives.

Page 56 of 65

9.16 Objective 16

To reduce building and project reliance on potable water supplies:


16a

Reduce operational water use through building design by incorporating water efficient fittings and appliances, water meters and leak detection equipment and rainwater harvesting

In order to conserve water, the LBSRP incorporated the following specification for fixtures and fittings in the operational station:

• All WCs will have an effective flush volume of 3 litres, (e.g. 4/2.l dual flush with flush volume of 2.3 litres) or less and will be fitted with a delayed action inlet valve.

• All taps except kitchen taps, cleaners’ sinks and external taps have a maximum flow rate less than 6 litres/min for a water pressure of 0.3MPa and will be one of, or a combination of, the following types:

▪ Timed automatic shut-off taps (e.g. push taps)

▪ Electronic sensor taps

▪ Low flow screw-down/lever taps

▪ Spray taps

• All urinals are either fitted with individual presence detectors that operate the flushing control after each use, or ultra-low flush or waterless urinals.

• All showers, if specified for staff changing rooms, will have a measured flow rate that does not exceed 9 litres per minute for a water pressure of 0.3MPa, assuming a delivered water temperature of 37ºC.

16b Incorporate sustainable urban drainage (SUDs) in design where feasible

Various sustainable urban drainage (SUD) features were considered at the design stage, however, several of these were assessed as not being viable options for the project – refer to the following document for more information on options considered: Form A – Approval in Principle – Public Health Services (N420-WSP-FOA-PH-000001; Section 6.5.7). One SUD feature was taken forward and incorporated into the design and implemented during construction, this being the installation of below ground attenuation tanks. These tanks store and slowly release surface water runoff. These attenuation tanks will help reduce the risk of downstream flooding by slowing down the rate at which surface water enters the sewers.

Limitations associated with redeveloping an existing site as opposed to developing a new site

16c

Each project will develop a water reduction plan to reduce operational (where applicable) and construction water use

For operational water use see comments for 16a.

Construction water use: The LBSRP implemented the Water Control Plan (N420-COT-PLN-EN-000013) and the Resource Efficiency Plan (N420-COT-PLN-EN-000007) to achieve both water efficient practices and innovative solutions during the construction

Page 57 of 65


phase. See Section 6.3 for a summary of water savings made during the construction phase. Example water efficiency best practices include:

• Beazley House Water Saving Measures

• Concrete Washout Water Saving Measures

These best practices are contained in the project Sustainability Best Practice book (N420-COT-REP-MD-000153)

Page 58 of 65

9.17 Objective 17

To increase the life of materials and reduce the consumption of virgin and unsustainable sources of materials:


17a

Design our structures to reduce future material use in maintenance and replacement and to accommodate future retrofits by increasing durability, reuse potential in deconstruction

Material/system choices were analysed and selected, where possible, based on their low environmental impact. Specifications for structural elements include external paint grade finishes and the design sought to use self-finishing materials where possible. See the Design Phase Sustainability Delivery Statement (N420-WSP-ERP-EN-000001), specifically the following sections – Materials Use Plan (Appendix 4), Lifecycle Energy and Carbon Study (Appendix 5), specifications.

17b

Specify materials to reduce environmental impact by using WRAP Construction Material Guidance and BRE Green Guide to Specification (no worse than B Rating)

The specification of BRE rated materials (no worse than B Rating) was contained with the Material Use Plan (MUP) (N420-COT-PLN-EN-000015), which was produced to ensure materials are procured in a sustainable manner. The document assessed materials through a scoring system using set criteria which ensured a whole life approach was implemented. The information obtained for the document was provided by manufacturers/suppliers and allowed the project, in most circumstances, to compare options from specific material suppliers to determine which option was the most sustainable.

The MUP was considered a useful tool for assessing the sustainability of materials to be procured and it provided a simple scoring system to allow easy comparison between different materials/ suppliers.

Ownership and responsibility for use of the MUP sat with the Project Environment Team. Should the use of a MUP be implemented on other projects, it is recommended that this ownership and responsibility sits with the Procurement Team and this team seeks input and assistance from the Environment Team as and when needed

It is noted that since 2014, Costain has introduced the Sustainability School training modules and Costain Procurement has implemented significant changes and new processes to improve sustainable sourcing, therefore, sustainable sourcing is now a primary consideration for Costain. With this in mind, the MUP may no longer be required should the Procurement Team have other suitable processes/ tools in place to ensure sustainable procurement. It is recommended that the Environment Team be invited to participate in any sustainable sourcing assessments or at least be kept informed of assessment outcomes and subsequent procurement decisions.

It is expected that most new Costain projects will contain a KPI around sustainable sourcing of materials. Typically, sustainability related KPIs are

Page 59 of 65


managed by the Project Environment Team, however, if the above recommendations are adopted, this KPI would need to sit with the Procurement Team.

17c

Not use insulation and other materials containing substances known to contribute to stratospheric ozone depletion and global warming

The Project was committed to not using insulation or other materials containing substances known to contribute to stratospheric ozone depletion and global warming. The Project kept a register detailing the decisions made to ensure these materials are not being used (N420-COT-REG-EN-000002).

Predominantly, what Costain and their Subcontractors use on-site is authorised by the Client during the design and specification process which eradicates the need to use ozone depleting or global warming substances.

17d Procure 100% certified timber and hold full chain of custody in line with NR timber policy

The project only procured 100% certified Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) or Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) timber from legal and sustainably managed sources. The project also maintained a timber chain of custody register (N420-COT-REG-EN-000009).

In addition to ensuring the chain of custody, the project also undertook annual assurance activities to ensure ongoing compliance with this target – these activities included three supplier audits and on site timber audits. Refer to the Sustainability Best Practice book (N420-COT-REP-MD-000153) for more information on sustainable timber achievements on the project.

17e 15% (stretch of 25%) reused or recycled content by value of new construction materials

Target met – 98% recycled content for steel reinforcement and between 30% and 60% for concrete. These two materials were the top two materials by volume used on the LBSRP. The LBSRP maintained a register to track the recycled content of materials – this is contained in the SDS Target Tracker (N420-COT-REG-EN-000004).

Best practice example: LBSRP sourced reinforcement steel that was comprised of 98% recycled content and is produced from 100% UK sourced recycled metal. Over 10,000 tonnes of reinforcement steel was used on the LBSRP, and given the recycled content, resulted in a 58% reduction (or reduction of 8,353.34 tCO2e) in the embodied carbon content compared against the industry standard. Refer to the Sustainability Best Practice book (N420-COT-REP-MD-000153) for more information.

This target proved problematic to interpret due to how it is written – unsure as to what is trying to be measured and achieved.

Page 60 of 65


17f 25% recycled content in aggregates

Target met – 99.8% of all aggregates used on the project comprised recycled materials. A recycled aggregate tracker is maintained – this is contained in the SDS Target Tracker (N420-COT-REG-EN-000004).

Best practice example: As part of the platform demolition, the project was required to remove 5000 m3 of existing backfill to be replaced by new recycled aggregate. Through a range of geotechnical testing, the site team was able to demonstrate that the existing backfill was suitable to reuse in accordance with the design specification – thereby, eliminating the need to remove and dispose of the backfill and the requirement to import fresh recycled aggregate. This saved the project ~£184,000 and ~49 tCO2e (around 600 wagon movements no longer required). Refer to the Sustainability Best Practice book (N420-COT-REP-MD-000153) for more information.

The project experienced some issues with the quality of imported recycled aggregate – contamination was problematic and consequently many loads were rejected. To address this, a procedure for importing recycled aggregate was developed, which included inspecting all suppliers for compliance with WRAP prior to engaging services.

This target proved problematic to interpret due to how it is written. Is it 25% of all aggregates to have a recycled content or is it all aggregates to have at least a 25% recycled content.

17g Identify key materials across TLP and procure in line with TLPs Responsible Sourcing Policy

The top 10 materials by volume for the project were identified as follows: concrete, grout, steel reinforcement, structural steel, canopy roof, flooring, bricks and blocks, timber, glazing and MEP equipment. A Materials Use Plan (MUP) was developed to ensure materials (including the top 10) were procured in a sustainable manner for the project. The MUP assessed materials through a scoring system using set criteria which ensured a whole life approach was considered. The MUP used a number of criteria, from extraction to decommissioning, to rank different suppliers and alternate products. Example criteria being: embodied carbon and energy, recycled content, toxicity, local sourcing, reuse, recyclability and durability.

More information can be found in the Sustainable Procurement and Materials Plan (N420-COT-PLN-EN-000011) and the MUP (N420-COT-PLN-EN-000015).

See MUP comments in Target 17b.

17h

Identify key materials across TLP and design and procure in line with TLPs Responsible Sourcing Policy and procedure

Covered above.

*It is highly recommended that at project commencement any materials related sustainability targets are clearly understood and that the necessary mechanisms are established to collect, track and analyse the relevant data to continuously assess performance against the targets. Doing this retrospectively can prove problematic and time consuming.

Page 61 of 65

9.18 Objective 18

To reduce waste generated and disposed of on TLP:


18a

All projects to reduce and divert at least 95% of waste from landfill using the waste hierarchy (with stretch target of zero waste to landfill for projects)

The following diversion percentages were achieved:

2013/14 - 99.5%, 2014/15 – 97.9%, 2015/16 -99.7% , 2016/17 – 99.7% , 2017/18 - 100%

The project utilised the SmartWaste online tool for tracking waste tonnages/ volumes. This tool was used mainly for waste data upload/ storage, however, the tool offers numerous other functions for analysing performance to inform management decision. This tool was under-utilised by the project due to personnel not being made aware of the full functionality of the tool and, therefore, the full functionality of the tool was not utilised nor realised by the project. Suggest personnel are trained in the full functionality of any data management tool adopted for use on a project – this training should form part of any hand-overs when there are staff changes or part of staff inductions into new roles.

18b Reduce waste during the design process

Refer to the design phase Sustainability Delivery Statement (N420-WSP-ERP-EN-000001). Two Designing Out Waste Workshops were held early in the design phase of the project with key members of the design team. Opportunities for minimisation through the on-site reuse of material during the construction phase were also explored. An additional workshop was held towards the completion of the design process to review progress and identify additional opportunities that may have arisen.

Section 2 of the Site Waste Management Plan (N420-COT-PLN-EN-000002) describes these waste minimisation measures pursued proactively by the design team. See also the Sustainability Best Practice book (N420-COT-REP-MD-000153) for information on:

• Reuse of Platform Backfill

• Managing Muck (Waste Soils)

• Demolition of the Train Shed

• Can Crusher: Hazardous to Non-Hazardous Waste

• Managing Waste Plasterboard

Page 62 of 65


18c Identify proposed locations for building waste storage facilities with adequate space for waste segregation

Operational: An Operational Waste Management Plan was developed (N420-COT-ERP-ER-000006) which considers operational waste issues and management associated with the planned increase in retail area that is proposed as part of the redevelopment of the station. The waste management plan also relates to operational wastes arising from the cleansing of trains as this material will be managed alongside retail generated wastes.

Construction: When the main construction site was on the southern side of the station adequate space for waste segregation was allocated on the temporarily stopped up St Thomas Street. However, when the southern part of the concourse opened in August 2016 and the construction site moved to the Bermondsey St car park, space was more limited and so waste could not be segregates on site. That said, the mixed waste skips were taken off site and manually segregated at the waste transfer sites and still achieved landfill diversion rates of over 95% (see 18a).

Waste segregation on site is not the only means to achieve high landfill diversion rates; a lack of space for such a facility need not be detrimental to performance. Projects should audit waste transfer sites before awarding waste contracts to select a high performing waste transfer site.

However, it should be noted off-site sorting of waste typically has higher costs (more labour intensive) and is more carbon intensive (more machinery intensive) – so on-site segregation is preferred over off-site segregation where possible.

Page 63 of 65

9.19 Objective 19

To maintain and enhance current land conditions and reduce risk of pollution and nuisance:


19a

Implement and monitor delivery of work package plans and task briefing sheets that comply with NR requirements for environment community and consents management

As per the project Construction Phase Plan (CPP: N420-COT-PLN-CS-000001), work package plans (WPPs) and task briefing sheets (TBS) were prepared for all site work packages. All WPPs contained a section where environmental (including community, heritage and consent) considerations were identified and appropriate control measures to protect or minimise impacts to these features detailed. The WPPs required review and approval from the Costain project Environment Team who consulted with the NR Consents Manager where required (i.e. with regards to heritage requirements). All WPPs are required to be reviewed and approved by a member of the Costain project Environment Team.

Once the WPP has been approved by all parties, the TBS is prepared – this details the site and task specific information, including relevant environmental and consent requirements.

Refer to the CPP (N420-COT-PLN-CS-000001) for more information on the WPP and TBS process.

Training should be provided to all persons involved with preparing and reviewing/ approving WPPs and TBS to ensure quality of these documents – this training will need to be provided on a regular basis throughout the project as new people join the project.

19b

The design review criteria will include the assessment, consideration and mitigation of risk of pollution to land and water

Pollution control measures are located within the tack drainage pipe network. The control measures are made up of silt traps and oil interceptor chambers. The system intercepts any water-borne sediment and oil from leakages or spillages prior to it entering the nearby sewers.

Refer to drawings (N420-COT-DRG-PH-030010, N420-COT-DRG-PH-030025, N420-COT-DRG-PH-030026) for more information.

Clear ownership for this target wasn’t established at the outset so it was difficult to understand the intent behind it. It is recommended that for future projects all targets are assigned an owner.

19c Apply BPM to minimise impact from noise & vibration and air pollutants and monitor performance

Best Practicable Means (BPM) were applied to manage noise, vibration and air emissions throughout the project.

Noise and vibration BPM were detailed in in the Noise and Vibration Control Plan (N420-COT-PLN-EN-000008) and noise BPM in each of the s.61 consents approved by the London Borough of Southwark (N420-COT-CNT-CS-000001). Noise and vibration monitoring was undertaken throughout the project using a network of fixed monitors located at key locations around the project boundary representative of key receptors. See the Noise and Vibration Control Plan (N420-COT-PLN-EN-000008) and the monthly monitoring reports (N420-COT-REP-MD-000151) for more details of the monitoring programme.

Air pollution BPM were detailed in the Environmental Nuisance Control Plan (N420-COT-PLN-EN-000006). Air quality monitoring was undertaken throughout the project using a network of fixed monitors around the project boundary representative of key receptors. See the Environmental Nuisance Control Plan

See Section 8.2 – Unattended Noise Monitors

Page 64 of 65


(N420-COT-PLN-EN-000008) and the monthly monitoring reports (N420-COT-REP-MD-000152) for more details of the monitoring programme.

Best practice example: The project was awarded the Noise Abatement Society’s ‘John Connell Award’ in 2016 for implementing a significant range of initiatives to reduce noise nuisance from the project construction phase for the benefit of the community and environment.

19d Each Tier 1 contractor shall identify and audit areas of their supply chain with the potential for high pollution risk

All waste services sub-contractors were audited – in 2017, four such sub-contractors utilised by the project were audited. In total, 13 audits of waste services sub-contractors were completed throughout the project – refer to Environmental Assurance Tracker (N420-COT-REG-EN-000005).

No significant findings were raised.

The audits were managed by the Environment Team, rather than the central assurance team (although it was fed into the central team). This worked well as the subject matter is highly regulated and intricate. If such audits are to form part of the central team’s audits, then an Environmental Manager would still need to provide technical input.

19e

Demonstrate continual improvement through a decrease in trends in incidents and noise & vibration complaints and increase in trends in close calls

Throughout the project, there was a:

• Decreasing trend in environmental incidents.

• Increasing trend in noise and vibration related complaints – reflective of the close proximity of sensitive receptors in the latter stage of the project. As works have moved away from platforms 1 & 2 towards the end of the project, the number of complaints has also reduced.

• Increasing trend in all complaints – reflective of the increased noise complaints. Construction noise complaints have decreased towards the project end, however operational noise complaints emerged once the platforms became fully operational. Although we note this is more of a TOC/ station matter rather than that of construction.

• Increasing trend in reporting environmental close calls. This is likely due to the introduction of electronic close call and observation reporting and a focus on improving reporting culture across site.

At the start of the project it was thought that Guy’s Hospital on the southern side of the station would be the most sensitive receptor due to proximity and nature of the premises. However, the residential flats on the northern side of the station proved to be the more noise sensitive receptors. Future projects are advised to fully consider different phases of the project when assessing receptor sites. In addition, some of the spikes observed in noise related complaints were attributable to new residents moving into the adjacent flats. Therefore, it is recommended that stakeholder contact lists are updated on an annual basis to ensure any new residents and/or businesses are included on the project newsletter distribution list.

Page 65 of 65

9.20 Objective 20

To maintain and enhance biodiversity on TLP:


20a

Enhance our habitat footprint to achieve a net biodiversity gain via the mitigation hierarchy in line with TLP Delivering Biodiversity Benefits Policy

No biodiversity was lost during construction (i.e. no de-vegetation took place), however, five nesting boxes for the rare Black redstart were installed at locations around the project and nine mature trees planted as part of urban realm development. In addition, several community gardening projects were supported by the project – see Objective 20b below.

It is advisable to engage ecologists to monitor the nesting boxes during nesting season to determine usage and success of the boxes. Preferable if this could be undertaken over several nesting seasons. Although this was not a planning condition, it would contribute to CEEQUAL scoring assessments.

20b Identify and work with local communities and businesses to improve green spaces

The project supported several community engagement initiatives which focused on community garden installations, effectively bringing greener environments into the urban area around the project. Best practice community garden projects including:

• Snowsfields Primary School garden and ‘bug hotel’.

• Cross Bones Garden, Red Cross Way.

More detail on these projects can be found in the project Sustainability Best Practice book (N420-COT-REP-MD-000153).

Being a static construction site over a period of several years gave the project a unique opportunity to develop long-term meaningful relationships with the surrounding community and is recommended to be adopted by other project is such a situation.

Targeting delivering smaller community projects but more frequently proved more beneficial and successful than targeted one or two larger community projects.

Documents

Thameslink Programme Environmental Management Plan and … · 2019-06-17 · Environmental Appraisal/Action Plan N420-WSP-ERP-EN-000005 The purpose of the Environmental Appraisal/Action